Duo or Quad?

M

Mystiq

n00b
Joined
Jun 11, 2006
Messages
14
Currently processors im thinking about are E8500, Q6600 (and possibly Q6700). From looking at some benchmark charts at Tomshardware.com, it seems that for applications (for the most part) Quad core processor would be the best option, then again the games tested seem to prefer Duo. Is this correct? Do games simply perform worse due to the game not using all the cores (multithreading)? Would Quad core be best bet for the future, when games actually do take full advantage of the "extra" cores?

Any help is appreciated!
 
Quad all the way, Why buy 2 cores, when you can get 4 cheap. The q600 OC's like mad and its cheap. Best choice in my book. My is running at 3.2 with a Tuniq. Spec's in Sig
 
e8xxx OCs 'madder' than q6600 if you want to compare it like that...Those top end chips, duo or quad will run games without CPU bottleneck. Applications that use 4 cores will benefit.. encoding and whatnot. Your net browsing and general desktop experience isn't going to have any difference on 2 or 4cores.
 
quad if you can afford it. easier to OC then to add cores. right now not much of a benefit, but the smoothness when multitasking is very nice, and soon or later more software will support more cores.
 
I haven't daily used a dual, but I can tell you the difference between a single core and a quad is night and day - so depending on how much you multi-task, you might like the quad more. Even encoding video I've never experienced a slow down - I have twenty items in the system tray and never feel like I need to close them down to get things to run faster.
 
I think ill go for quad. One more thing; Are all the current quad cores available 2x dual core quads e.g. not "true" quad? Also how about the heat on quad cores CPU vs dual core? What are the typical min/max temperatures on Q6600 and equivalent quad core processors?

Heres a review of the E8600 and they include few of the CPUs im looking at the moment. I think if im going for quad, i should pick of the 45nm ones, which the Q6600 is not(?).

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/core2duo-e8600.html
 
Mystiq said:
I think ill go for quad. One more thing; Are all the current quad cores available 2x dual core quads e.g. not "true" quad? Also how about the heat on quad cores CPU vs dual core? What are the typical min/max temperatures on Q6600 and equivalent quad core processors?

Heres a review of the E8600 and they include few of the CPUs im looking at the moment. I think if im going for quad, i should pick of the 45nm ones, which the Q6600 is not(?).

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/core2duo-e8600.html
Click to expand...

The Q6600 still (for me at least) is the biggest bang for the buck quad out there. With the newer 45nm chips you either get a slower chip or pay quite a bit more for a chip with similar performance. They really only bring SSE4 and maybe a little bit less power consumption to the table. Q6600's are general quite good overclockers if that is your concern (not as good as dual cores, but for quads, they are).
 
Why don't you explain what you want to use the computer for. How can you expect someone to advise you on a CPU, when the best option is entirely dependent on how you use your computer?
 
Quad...got my Q6600 running @ 3.2ghz and it's one of the worst overclockers. It has a VID of 1.325. My temps are actually VERY good with a cheap Arctic Cooling Freezer 7 Pro and the temps on the cores are all within 5*C. I don't even multi-task and am very happy with my Q6600 coming from an E2180 @ 3.2ghz....all I do is game, watch movies, and surf the net

The difference between a Q6600 @ 3.2ghz and a E8500 @ 3.6ghz is only a few FPS...otherwise not noticable. You can overclock both to higher clocks, but you can't unlock more cores lol
 
Is it true that if you overclock the Q6600 it disables the power management stuff? Like the chip can't switch to lower power at idle or something? Some guy at a store told me that's the case for the Dual Cores like the E8500. I just don't want the thing to be a power vacuum if I overclock it. :)
 
Belzebutt said:
Is it true that if you overclock the Q6600 it disables the power management stuff? Like the chip can't switch to lower power at idle or something? Some guy at a store told me that's the case for the Dual Cores like the E8500. I just don't want the thing to be a power vacuum if I overclock it. :)
Click to expand...

That's not true at all. You can enable or disable the power management features at will through the BIOS, but they remain enabled or disabled regardless of whether or not the CPU is overclocked.
 
All the current Intel quad-cores, until Core i7, are 2 dual-core dies stuck together. Phenoms are true quad cores (not that it helps them much). It's not really anything to worry about though.

If you overclock, you'll generally want to set a fixed CPU voltage, and at least on most motherboards this will disable the voltage-reducing ability of SpeedStep, although it will still clock the CPU down and so you'll still be saving some power.
 
Mithent said:
If you overclock, you'll generally want to set a fixed CPU voltage, and at least on most motherboards this will disable the voltage-reducing ability of SpeedStep, although it will still clock the CPU down and so you'll still be saving some power.
Click to expand...

This is what I was talking about, how much does that affect power consumption?
 
Belzebutt said:
This is what I was talking about, how much does that affect power consumption?
Click to expand...

Well just as an example (take with a grain of salt)
My quad runs at 1.375V. When it clocks down, it clocks down to 1600mhz
My APC powerchute software says overall system wattage drops from about 250 to 225.
Its kinda neat to watch the wattage move around as I am doing different things with the PC.
 
CamaroZ28 said:
Why don't you explain what you want to use the computer for. How can you expect someone to advise you on a CPU, when the best option is entirely dependent on how you use your computer?
Click to expand...

PC will be mainly for "work", so its mainly "heavy apps" and occasional gaming. Hence why im leaning towards quad core CPU. Im not interested in overclocking just something thats stable and runs relatively cool. Motherboard will likely be one of the Gigabyte EP45, one with proper (heatpipe) cooling.

Mithent said:
All the current Intel quad-cores, until Core i7, are 2 dual-core dies stuck together. Phenoms are true quad cores (not that it helps them much). It's not really anything to worry about though.

If you overclock, you'll generally want to set a fixed CPU voltage, and at least on most motherboards this will disable the voltage-reducing ability of SpeedStep, although it will still clock the CPU down and so you'll still be saving some power.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the info. Was just curious about this as i did try googling about this but was only able tofind out that some Xeon processor from Intel is a "true quad".

Danny Bui said:
QFT

Also, OP, if you had done a simple search of this forum, you would've seen that your question has been asked in one way or another (E8400 VS Q6600, E8500 VS Q6600 etc):
http://hardforum.com/search.php?searchid=10491093&pp=15&page=2
Click to expand...

Sorry, my bad.
 
Mystiq said:
PC will be mainly for "work", so its mainly "heavy apps" and occasional gaming. Hence why im leaning towards quad core CPU. Im not interested in overclocking just something thats stable and runs relatively cool. Motherboard will likely be one of the Gigabyte EP45, one with proper (heatpipe) cooling.



Thanks for the info. Was just curious about this as i did try googling about this but was only able tofind out that some Xeon processor from Intel is a "true quad".



Sorry, my bad.
Click to expand...

"Work" and "Heavy Apps" is no where near descriptive enough, the reason it is important to know what programs you will be using with your computer is because some programs are more multithreaded then others, and there is no way to determine which would be better for you without knowing what you were doing exactly.
 
NimTheMad said:
I'm pretty happy with my Q6600.
Click to expand...

I agree with this. I have it at stock speed and it works just fine. I'm not to hardcore about what my specs are, and I very frequently consider overclocking and I need money for a better cooling system...

I recommend quad. Futureproof.

COD4 works fine on mine, and just as well as on a DC. BF2, Crysis, 2142, etc. all work just fine.
 
Another vote for the quad route if you have the extra money to spend. It all depends on your perception though. If a year down the line, more programs are making use of quad cores, will you want to go out and buy one?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top